The Issue of Copyright - Essay Example

INTERNET: STRONG SURVEILLANCE DUE TO STRONG LAWS Copyright is no longer a local or regional issue, rather this issue has to be discussed on international level and concrete efforts and achievement has taken place in this context. The issue of copyright rose once the world turned into global village, previously before the advent of internet, copyright was much common, and in many of the cases the offender violated the notion of copyright without any feel of accountability, rather the offender use to term his action as contribution or propagation of resources and knowledge. It was never too late, never the originator realized that their contribution has received acknowledgement in different regions, and there is no mention of their name and contribution. Copyright laws have provided concrete protection to the misuse of art, however it fails to up bring and provides opportunities to other artist to work upon and carry forward the work of other master piece. Copyright laws have banned the duplication or any other form of plagiarisms, neither has it permitted any form of alteration or modification efforts of the individual for the improvement of the work piece. Therefore if Copyright laws are positive step towards protection of the master piece, however it has taken an offensive step against the emerging artist who seeks alteration in previous master piece. Therefore it is really important for the artist community to understand that the implementation of copyright laws have narrowed the spectrum of creativity that the young artist possessed to launch and experiment their skills in early stages. Internet has so far being partially successful in execution and implementation of the copyright laws, initially the services and offerings of the internet operated not under any international copyright agreement. During this period it was observed that the emerging artist seek guidance from the masterpiece available, this practice was enhancing their skills, but later when few of those involved themselves into malpractice the society realized that copyright laws needed to be implemented internationally. The positive aspects was ignored i.e. skills and motivations of the young artist was improving. The internet regulation and monitoring is however stable in developed countries, it is saddening to observe that in many developing countries like China, Pakistan and India, internet is still the frequent mode of plagiarism, all this is under the notice of the internet agencies based in United States and Europe, but no action has been taken because such regulations and violations are not considered offensive in those countries. ‘Therefore the privileges of internet has scattered allover, however its scrutiny has been limited, either due to the lack of progress or interests of some authorities’ (Kurt M. Saunders (2001). Practical Internet Law for Business). Interestingly what we observe is that people from these highlighted regions have excelled in art and literature, these artists have never faced any legal barrier in their growth, and their growth resulted due to the fact that these artists had access to the masterpiece work of arts. The execution of copyright laws has affected the promotion and growth of art and literature in under developed and developing countries, where artist experience dearth of resources. Therefore it is important to understand that copyright laws have not developed positive impact on the growth and promotion of young artists. . CREATIVE COMMON SYSTEM Creative commons is non governmental organization; the organization has been established with the vision to allow the originator to modify their version of copyright laws solely applicable on their ideas and products. ‘The company has an objective to define flexible copyright for their creative works’ (Common Creative Society and Impact). The organization was launched by group of intellectual property experts, lawyers and web publishers. Creative Commons system has performed successfully in North America and Europe. The organization has provided the creator with an opportunity to place conditions on their copyrights. The company offers flexibility by allowing the creator (copyright holder) the ability to choose what limitations they want to apply on their creative work. The creator has to define the level of restrictions, attributes or modifications to be assigned on particular work. The company has offered more than hundred thousand licenses to their registered user, who avail the opportunity to get their work registered and further allow the official permission of alteration, modification and duplication. The Creative Commons site also provides a website icon that clearly marks the creative work as Some Rights Reserved or No Rights Reserved. Creative Common System has provided the originator with an opportunity to introduce desired amendments and utilization of their work place, with demoralizing the originator and his work. The license given by the Creative common System does not signify that the copyright holder i.e. originator is relinquishing rights to a piece of art, rather interprets the restrictions and conditions that are imposed on the application of the creative work piece. The Common Creative System has introduced such regulations which already have the consent of the artist community. ‘It has different features, for example, non commercial license allows others to duplicate, distribute, perform creative works and derivative works for noncommercial or research purpose’ (Common Creative Society and Impact). Another license permits others to distribute derivative works, with the same legal status as hold by the originator. Creative Common System has introduced an Attribution license, the license grants the permission of copying, distribution and display or performance of the work, only if the name of the originator is introduced, and is appreciated. Certain artists have reservations against the operation of Creative Common System. The concerns are however balanced but the medium of Creative Common System has given ample opportunity to the artist for the exposure and improvement of their work piece, the system also assures financial guarantee to the originator, because no artist will tolerate others making financial gains from the work. The System has kept balance between the ownership, credit and use. COPYRIGHT ISSUE Copyright gives protection and security to the ownership of the work piece. The practice of promoting copyright has been widely encouraged; however there are still few who condemn this act of protection and security. According to them, art is liberal exercise, the artist should therefore have the right to adopt any idea, and amend it accordingly. Considering an example of intellectuals, no one is born genius, the intellectuals never evolved their own perception and conception towards any event, what intellectuals conveyed is all that they have understood from their experience and surrounding. ‘Art is not truly an inbuilt feature, it nourishes inside an individual, but it is the society that monitors and sketches its domain, therefore even an artist is not the real and original representative of his personal work’ (Deven R Desai, David W. Quinto (2001). Law of Internet Disputes). The actual creditor is the society. Therefore if certain copyright regulations are imposed on the utilization and propagation of that artistic work piece, that is unfair, because the actual masterpiece is itself not truly a personal innovation. If certain imposition regarding the propagation of art work and literature is imposed, and its utilization is discouraged, this is entirely a wrong practice. The right of utilization of the resources should be allowed, if the artist has a vision to modify and introduce certain new dimension to it, which the originator never thought of, therefore such imposition restricts the domain of human creativity. ‘The practice of copyright is not entirely condemnable, of course no one holds the right to promote and associate the credibility of the work towards them, instead of originator’. The copyright regulations are effective enough to hold and support that. However such regulations should not protect the work piece such that its interpretation and manifestation has limited and controlled domain. REFERENCES 1. Common Creative Society and Impact. Retrieved on 21st Jan, 2007 from: http://www.feedforall.com/ and http://www.notepage.net/ 2. Kurt M. Saunders (2001). Practical Internet Law for Business. 3. Richard Dannay (2004). Advanced Seminar on Copyright Law, 2004. 4. Deven R Desai, David W. Quinto (2001). Law of Internet Disputes. Read More